AIMS Final results of sufferers undergoing percutaneous coronary involvement (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare steel stents (BMS) never have been examined separately for particular dual and triple antiplatelet agent make use of. RESULTS A complete of four RCTs including 1457 sufferers using a median follow-up amount of 6-9 a few months had been contained in the evaluation. The prices of major undesirable cardiac and/or cerebrovascular occasions (MACE/MACCE) stent thrombosis and bleeding weren’t considerably different between triple and dual antiplatelet therapy groupings. Pooled evaluation demonstrated that cilostazol was connected with considerably decreased occurrence of in portion restenosis (ISR) (OR 0.51 95 CI 0.38 0.68 < 0.00001) increased least luminal size (MLD) (WMD 0.16 95 CI 0.10 0.22 < 0.00001) for both DES and BMS Tivozanib and in addition individually. Nevertheless the prices of focus on vessel revascularization (OR 0.45 95 CI 0.25 0.83 = 0.01 and past due lumen reduction (pooled WMD 0.14 95 CI 0.2 0.07 = 0.001) were decreased significantly only in the DES group receiving triple therapy. CONCLUSIONS Cilostazol is apparently effective in reducing the prices of ISR without the significant benefit for MACE/MACCE. dual therapy. The overall performance of bare metallic stents (BMS) is definitely suboptimal in terms of freedom from restenosis and repeat percutaneous coronary treatment (PCI) in lesions at high risk of restenosis. Another aspect of management of these individuals is definitely that BMS are the most commonly used stents in our setting due to poor affordability of drug-eluting stents (DES). Therefore there is a great need to prevent neointimal hyperplasia and stent restenosis. Some pharmacological providers have been investigated for their usefulness when added to the standard restorative routine in reducing restenosis rates when used in individuals undergoing PCI with BMS. However this has mainly been unsuccessful [4]. Ours is definitely a tertiary care centre and in recent years increasing attempts have been made to incorporate principles of evidence-based medicine in guiding medical practice. Such evidence is also used in making policy-related decisions. These practices are based on reports that have demonstrated better therapeutic results associated with evidence-based medicine [5 6 In order to provide an evidence-based answer to the medical query which is definitely pertinent to the practice at our centre we undertook a literature search. During our initial literature search we came across 30 studies and interestingly on Tivozanib the day of query we also came across a systematic review on the same topic [7]. The main conclusions of the review were that cilostazol was safe Tivozanib and effective in reducing the risk of restenosis and repeat revascularization without any significant increase in bleeding rates and incidence of stent thrombosis (ST). In the above meta-analysis 23 studies were analysed of which only three compared the triple therapy (clopidogrel based) with dual therapy. No subgroup analysis specifically addressed our query related to the use of the triple regimen of aspirin clopidogrel and cilostazol. With this background we undertook a meta-analysis to answer the query raised in cardiology practice. Methods Search strategy and study selection We systematically searched Medline Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embsase for all relevant TSHR articles up to May 2008. We first entered the medical subjects heading (MeSH) terms and text words including Next we searched using the MeSH terms and text words with AND = 0.06). However on subgroup Tivozanib analysis there was a significant difference between the two groups favouring the triple drug therapy in patients undergoing PCI with DES (OR 0.38 95 CI 0.38 0.72 = 0.003) (Figure 1). Figure 1 Studies comparing major adverse cardiac event/major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event frequencies in triple and dual antiplatelet therapy groups using pooled odds ratio (OR) Target vessel revascularization Four studies [9-12] including 1725 patients were included for this analysis. There was no difference in the incidence of TVR between triple and dual antiplatelet therapy for the combined analysis of BMS and DES (pooled OR 0.75 95 CI 0.53 1.04 = 0.08). However when the DES were considered alone there were significant differences between the two groups favouring triple drug therapy in patients with DES placement (pooled OR 0.45 95 CI 0.25 0.83 =.